John

I have compared the 1.25" 2x ES Telextender with a 1.25" 2.5x Powermate and the difference was very slight indeed to be honest. I guess it's the same as is being found quite often these days ES have got within a few % of the Tele Vue equivalent performance for quite a lot less money. While I've not used the 2 inch ES Telextenders I can't see any reason why they would not mirror this situation. You can't mix ES products with TV in the eyepiece case though - they squabble when you close the lid !

This thread is in danger of becoming an elaborate discourse on the topic of diagonals which might not actually be of much practical help to the original poster I think Moonshanes post hits the nail on the head with regard to the original question:

Usually with a barlow in place, you need to find a bit more inwards focuser travel to reach focus. Is that your problem - lack of enough inwards focuser movement ? The X-Cel ED barlow goes betwen the diagonal and the eyepiece I believe - is that where you are putting yours ? Edit: could you post a photo of the focuser end of your scope as you have been using it so that we can double check on the componants. The Tak diagrams are all well and good but it's not all that clear which adapter is which.

They are excatly the same telescope under different brandings. The manufacturer is GSO (Guan Sheng Optical). I think the accessories supplied at the same as well. Flip a coin to decide perhaps ? In the UK these were marketed under the "Revelation" branding. Good scopes. Similar in performance to the Skywatcher dobsonians. Meade dobs (the Lightbridges) are also made by GSO and will contain the same optics as the ones that you are looking at.

Nice choices Alan I've yet to use a DeLite. A few tempting ones popped up for sale during the Xmas period but I resisted. I had a 3mm Radian for a while and that was good but I expect the Delite of that focal length would exceed it by some margin being a later design using newer glass types and coatings. Currently I use a 2-4mm TV Nagler zoom or a Pentax XW 3.5mm to cover that FL and they seem pretty good to me but there is always room for a little more improvement I'm sure I ran an Ethos SX 3.7mm alongside the Pentax 3.5mm for several months but eventually concluded that the XW was just a touch sharper and scatter free. So my Ethos SX's (I had the 4.7 too) went to other homes as well.

What were you trying to view through the window and how far away was it ?

If you can see nothing it's not the collimation, it's something else. Collimation improves the view in terms of resolution and sharpness but even an uncollimated scope will show reasonably good images of the stars, planets, the moon etc. Perhaps you could give us more details of what you have been trying to view, the accessories you are using with the scope at the time and the results. We will then hopefully be able to diagonse the problem

I'm pleased that there are positive SW ED150 experiences being had Chris - the scope deserves some good news given the rather uncertain start it had (not yours, which was fine from the off of course). I'm hoping to have another one to try out for the forum sometime next year

Unfortunately not - I have to make do with aluminum cases. Moy other half seems to have crammed the cabinets with bric-a-brac !

Nice little telextender from Uncle Al

It's the same as the Skywatcher Explorer 200P - made by the same manufacturer. I wonder if the mirror cell is moving around rather than the primary mirror itself ? I've owned a couple with this design and they hold their collimation well usually. I generally collimate with the scope at around a 45 degree angle.

What scope are we discussing ?

It's said that you should be able to slide a piece of thin card between the clips and the primary mirror surface. Not to be actually tried of course but it illustrates that the clips really don't need to be tight at all.

I used to have the 1984 Skysensor - now that was a "brick" !

I've fitted a set of dual axis (non goto) Skywatcher EQ5 drives onto my Vixen GP DX mount - they fitted straight on without modification. I would expect that the Skywatcher EQ5 GOTO system would fit onto the Vixen GP to replace the Vixen drives that you have fitted. The Vixen ones have a "tip negative" power connector I think which is the opposite to the Skywatcher system. The Vixen motors use a 8 pin DIN type connector. I believe that the Meade LXD55 motors and handset (which are GOTO) will fit and work with the Vixen GP mounts. There maybe other options that I'm not aware of.

Wow, just wow Matt !

I get my flu jab later this week. Meanwhile, the postman delivered another star atlas today - The Atlas of the Night Sky by Storm Dunlop. Illustrated by Will Tiron and Antonin Rukl. £7 pre-owned but mint and delivered.

What a dull thread (and possibly much shorter !) it would have been if the OP's post had been taken literally ! My cases have stayed looking the same from the outside for the past 5 years or more. The contents have changed a little bit though

I find it easier to grasp larger eyepieces from the sides rather than from the top. It's a bigger chunk to get gloved fingers around, where the rubber grips tend to be, much less chance of touching a lens accidently and no chance of the dust cap getting in the way of a clean, safe, pickup. Also the focal lengths tend to be on the side or shoulders of the eyepieces. I can see that upright storage of smaller eyepieces such as my orthos could make sense though.

Thanks Gordon. The exceptions are the poor orthos which just rattle around in an old cigar box ! I'll have to find some better storage for those ......

With the cubed foam and my method, if you change eyepieces, you can pull the cubes back up to a flat surface and then re-depress them to fit the new eyepiece size and shape.

I use a method which involves pressing the eyepieces into the cubed foam rather than removing foam chunks. I used to change my eyepieces a lot so this approach enabled me to change the layout without needing the replace the foam inners. I'd have gone through a lot of foam if it was not for this approach !

I keep saying to myself that I'm going to cut down on a few of the less used ones but then I try them and like them all over again. Hopeless - I'm just not ruthless enough when it comes to eyepieces

I seem to be quite settled with this selection now:

I don't have the facility to film it I'm afraid. You turn the laser collimator slowly around 360 degrees, stopping every 90 degrees and marking the position of the laser dot on a piece of paper taped up around 30 feet from the laser unit. The V-block and laser unit must stay completely still in one place of course during this rotation. That shows you how far out the unit currently is. Then you pick a grub screw, hold the laser collimator in place in the V block (and the V-block exactly where it was as well) and make an adjustment to the screw noting which way the laser dot moves - hopefully towards a spot at or near the centre of your 4 90 degree marks. The repeat the rotation, mark accordingly and adjust again as necessary. It is a bit trial and error I'm afraid.